Two quick points on this subject. One, who in the hell pays any attention to anything Illinois does. They could have worn orange construction cones on their heads and not a fuck would be given. Two, Whitlock ate Uncle Tom. This bloated bumb actually thinks the public reacted to Lebron's decision circus the way it did because of race. He should have the race card tattooed on his forearm.

Everyone knows the Fab Five weren't the first with baggy shorts. MJ had them (but not as long as the Fab Five) and so did Arkansas. The Fab Five did popularize them more than anyone else though. So shove it Illinois, no one gives a flying fuck.

The fab five had them in 1991. Arkansas 2 years later, in 93-94, when they switched to the unis with stripes that ran vertically and split and fanned out on the shorts. So, no, your Arkansas statement isn't correct. I'd embed photos but I'm lazy and am generally bad at embedding.

Whitlock is usually pretty good, but again you have a writer who knows better cherry picking to fit his agenda.

Rose's "Uncle Tom" and Laetner's a bitch comments were retold as what he thought when he was 18. He explained how he was angry and jealous. He explains himself beautifully so you can see it from the eyes of a poor kid in the ghetto. He was wrong he said it several times during his media blitz, but he was honest as to how he felt at the time.

Whitlock cherry picks this to make Rose look bad. I hate when writers give incomplete facts to frame their argument. Whitlock said he worked in Ann Arbor it sure sounds like he worked for the Freep.

The shame of it is he has a decent point in the article, but he loses me when I know he's not balancing both sides and he knows it. Poor job Jason/

I live in Kansas City and am pretty sure he was writing here during the Fab Five days so he has no clue what was going on in their heads in lives at that point! Whitlock is a hack who only tries to press the race card b/c he can't actually write a good article. As far as Illinois goes...stop crying! They did wear baggy shorts before Michigan but nobody knew about it.The Fab Five popularized it and made it a trend. Something they couldn't do. If i remember right the Illinois team in question didnt even make the finals that year. Michigan did and won the whole thing!

The "Uncle Tom" comments have absolutely been taken out of context. If you actually watched the documentary, you will see that it is Jalen Rose reflecting on his attitudues (and immaturity) as an 18-year old.

Putting aside the Illini's beef. This quote might have some truth to it. It was very pro-fab5. Its easy to see a much more negative documentary about the same events. Also seeing as Jalen works for the channel that produced it, its not that much of a stretch.

It's from the perspective of the players. Sure it could have been much less favorable in the Ed Martin portion, but this was more about the culture of the Fab 5 and how they were in college and how they changed the game. The only really legitimate gripe is that Webber didn't say anything about it or participate in any way.

I thought the film was a pretty honest account. It didn't seem to omit much. It talked about Ed Martin, and Rose even admitted taking "a couple grand" from him even though he never was named in the NCAA report. It mentioned Rose's ticket in the drug raid, which was a major controversy at the time (but has been mostly forgetten since and could have been swept under the rug). It showed some of the most brash trash-talking, showed Webber cursing out cameramen, showed them acting like babies in Europe, showed Rose (presumably underage at the time) slamming a 40 at a frat party . . . if you came into this movie with a negative view of the Fab Five, I'm not sure it would have changed your opinion.

The one "fantasy" aspect of the film I can buy is that Rose may have glossed over Ed Martin's shadiness. They did include Webber's denunciation of Martin, but portrayed it in a way to make Webber look like a liar. Yeah, another documentary might have stressed just how ill-gotten that money was and how Martin was a scumbag. But aside from that, I don't know that it would show much else differently.

I guess in my mind the major area where they could have given differing accounts was in the outside people that came in and gave commentary. For example, I don't buy Mitch Albom's assertion that CWeb couldn't have possibly gotten paid until after the final four. I'm sure there are people with differing opinions on things like that. Yet they bring in Albom as if he was just an objective observer.

Also, they really sold that UNC team short. I mean, its one thing to assert that you were the better team yet lost (as Jalen does over and over), but that team was solid and pretty much led the whole way in that game. As a poster mentions above, being told through the eyes of the fab5, I guess that makes sense. But if thats the case, why have Albom giving his fluff all over the documentary? Why not just keep it to the 5 to tell the story?

I don't know if I fully buy Albom's explanation either, but no one else has ever come forward to contradict that, and he's the only one to have written a book on them, so he's basically all we've got to report on that (other than Webber himself, obviously).

As for UNC, while Jalen himself certainly believed that they were inferior, I thought they still made it clear that it was an extremely hard-fought game. They showed several UNC baskets, Webber getting knocked to the floor, etc. They noted that we were behind at the half and at the time of the timeout. To be honest, I agree with Jalen - I think we had the best team in the country that year. UNC was a solid team, but they certainly didn't have as much overall talent. We didn't play our best game. Someone linked the box score the other day - it was basically Webber and King that played well. Rose, Howard and Jackson all struggled and the bench didn't do much (other than Pelinka making a couple threes).

I think the game was lost on the bracketing. The 2nd best team and the one that scared me was Kentucky. And we had the last Primetime game against them that was a complete war, while NC had already finished with a subpar Kansas team (that we beat easily by double digits in Hawaii). If the regions had been reversed, we would have rocked Kansas and rested while NC would have burned themselves out besting Kentucky, if they even could. We looked tired on one day's rest after finishing late in one of the all time great college basketball Tournament games, and I think some of our guys didnt have the legs or same focus.

I had read about the Illinois thing a few years ago. But even Bardo and Gill say in the article the Fab Five took it to another level and were actually influential. I vaguely remember the "Flyin' Illini" nickname, but nobody cares about them now.

In 1992, when high school teams across the country ordered new, longer shorts, they did it to "look like Michigan." No one did it to look like Illinois. It doesn't matter if they were first or not. No one paid attention until we did it.

I actually think there's some merit in Whitlock's article. Maybe I have a different perspective cus I am black, but I usually find his columns insightful, even if I don't agree with him. I do think he was a little harsh on Jalen, since Jalen was just giving his perspective, and Whitlock basically just called him wrong. I think Whitlock's point is that the documentary kinda turns black athletes that should be heralded (the 'uncle toms') into villains; and celebrates a less-accomplished team (although he overstates their mediocrity), just because they embraced a style and culture that got them noticed. It's a microcosm of the problem in hip hop today.

I think Whitlock et. al. interpreting Jalen's comments about "Uncle Tom's" is a gross misunderstanding. Jalen said it himself: he had no disrespect for Grant Hill or the players of that ilk, he was more jealous of the circumstance they grew up in. I don't think he came accross as saying players with the fortunate upbringing ala Grant Hill should be portrayed as villains, more that he felt that way when he was younger...

I do think he was a little harsh on Jalen, since Jalen was just giving his perspective...

I agree. Jalen certainly seemed to be explaining how he and his teammates felt at that time rather than some reality as he still sees it. It is relevant because it explains the mentality of the Fab 5 based on where they were coming from, and IMO it eventually play into the "shock the world" mentality as well as the fear of being exploited. Particularly important is the stark contrast of childhood experiences of Jalen and Grant Hill, both sons of former pro athletes, and how it made Jalen feel at that time. Context is everything, and I feel that Whitlock ingores a little of that.

How can you even take Whitlock serious when he says Chris Webber posted that blog post? If he did ANY research at all, he would've found out that it was a writer on the blog, that's why it says "By Dice". He loses all credibility right there.

Not to mention, style over substance? BRB Two Final Fours with 5 freshman starters. Bad enough that he writes it, but looking at the comments is unbelievable as people actually agree? Some guy says that the Fab Five was 'never even really that good'. LULZ That's just funny as shit.

The ignorance is killing me. Wish stupid people would just go away for once... unless they're funny, which he is not.

said it well - Whitlock is an idiot. The documentary may have its faults but probably fewer glaring faults then Whitlock's idiotic article. Whitlock claims that the Fab Five was style over substance even though they made it to the NCAA championship game BOTH years they were in existence as underclassmen - barely losing in the second year on a fluke play. Yeah, style over substance. What an idiot. He also claims Fisher didn't coach. Again, anybody who watched the Fab Five play or is familiar with Fisher's career knows this is an idiotic statement. Fisher was able to get five freshman and sophomores to play unselfishly as a team and coached them to two straight national title games. The 1989 Michigan team didn't coach itself to a national championship either. Fisher may not be perfect but he is, at the very least, a very good coach. Whitlock goes on to rant and rave about Michigan as a "white school" and Fisher as a "white coach." What a racist clown. And idiot.

comments regarding Duke were more self-depricating than anything else. I watched that documentary twice intently. Jalen and Jimmy's comments during that movie were cut against Jalen's admission that Duke's players actually had game, film on Grant Hill dunking all over M on several occassions, C-Webb acting like a spolied kid after the National Championship game loss, and many of the Fab Five acting like entitled asses for a good portion of their trip to Europe. If anything, that entire portion of the movie left the viewer with less of an affection for the Fab Five and more of an appreciation for Duke. And Jalen wrote and produced a lot ot if.

Not all of the movie was about celebrating the Fab Five, much of it came across to me as a story of lessons learned too late and a reflection of what those lessons were. A person cannot tell a story of a historical event without placing it in the correct context and telling the story of the time. The story of the Titanic cannot be told without presenting the attitude of many that the ship could not sink. Is it wrong for the producer of a movie about the Titanic to detail that attitude because it proved not to be the case?

The Fab Five have grown up, they are not who they were as was presented by their conduct and attitude while telling the story. Telling the audience what their perspective was is not condoning the perspective nor did that movie make you want to sympathize with their perspective at that time.

Whitlock was going to write the peice before he even watched the movie, that is if he even watched it at all. That article is a joke.